if you are interested in videos on suppressed information,you have to see this site. All the videos are streamed,nicely cataloged by subject.# Health Info# Corporatism# False Flag Ops# Secret Societies# Mind Control

and in the western world it would be seen as even worse, an attack on the christian day of rest."how to rally the masses" comes to mind, this would be something that would sucker every one in sympathy and apathylike 911, cause they can spin it so nice in the media.

easter.. i would not know but it would help again in rallying the masses.

Logged

love for freedom can not be killed nor silenced.sui : dead and still alive

if there were an false flag attack against Israel on a Jewish holidaythat might unite the Jewish peopleand the world might be sympathetic to an Israel attack against ?

We must remember what was said about a year ago, when the US-Iran tensions became common place in the MSM.

Israel and Syria are at each others necks, Syria and Iran are allies. Iran has stated, on TV, that if Israel attacks Syria, then they will fire missiles at Israel and "wipe it off the face of the earth". If that happens, then the US, as very strong allies of Israel, has no choice but to defend our friend and retaliate against Iran. Full scale war is but a stones throw away at that point.

If there is an attack in Israel, believe that this will most likely come to be.

The whole Easter thing for Orthodox Christians is a moot point in my scenario. Unless they expect the public to believe that the Israelites practice Christianity. That could work if you use the word Orthodox. Most people associate that term to Jewish people.

Remember......people in general are not that bright.

Dan

Logged

My freedom is more important than your good idea.

When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state". - Claire Wolfe

You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one. -Rush Limbaugh

"Liberty has never come from government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is a history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of government power, not the increase of it." http://sedm.org/

24/03/08 "ICH" --- - The investigative journalist Edward Jay Epstein has taken up the Litvinenko case.The media used the Litvinenko case as sensational propaganda against Russian President Putin and then tossed it aside. For those whose memories of the case have faded, Alexander Litvinenko was a former KGB officer living in England who died in 2006, apparently from the radioactive isotope Polonium-210.

The British government encouraged the tale that Russian President Putin had sent Andrei Lugovoi to poison Litvinenko’s tea at a meeting on November 1, 2006. The story appealed to people brought up on James Bond thrillers, but the story never made any sense. Polonium 2-10 is a rare and tightly controlled substance as likely to contaminate the assassin as the victim. There are far easier and more effective ways of killing someone.

Moreover, there is no evidence to connect Russia to Litvinenko’s death. But this didn’t stop the British government from grandstanding, sending an extradition request for Lugovoi in July 2007. The British government sent the request despite the facts that there is no extradition treaty between Britain and Russia and the Russian constitution prohibits the extradition of Russian citizens. Epstein suggests that the purpose of the extradition request was to block the Russian government from investigating Litvinenko’s death in London. Litvinenko had a false passport provided by the British government. A real investigtion might have opened up the shadowy world of security consultants in which Litvinenko rubbed shoulders with former British police and intelligence officials.

The Russians asked to see the evidence. The case file delivered by the British contained nothing of substance. Not even the autopsy report was provided to the Russians. Epstein managed to convince the Russians to let him see the file and to question them about the case. In brief, if the British have a case, they are withholding the evidence.

The charge that Putin was behind Litvinenko’s death seems to have originated with Boris Berezovsky, one of the Russian Jewish oligarchs who had grabbed the lion’s share of privatized Soviet assets during Yeltsin’s presidency. http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/Berezovsky.htm Epstein reports that Berezovsky’s protector in Russia was Litvinenko, the deputy head of the organized crime unit of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), the successor to the KGB. When Berezovsky fled Russia to escape fraud charges, Litvinenko followed. Epstein reports that Berezovsky has declared an agenda of “overtrowing the regime of his archenemy, Mr. Putin.” According to Epstein, “Alex Goldfarb, the executive director of Mr. Berezovsky’s foundation, prepared for Litvinenko’s end by writing out his ‘deathbed’ statement, which, according to Mr. Goldfarb, was drawn from statements Litvinenko had dictated to him.”

Epstein writes: “A few hours after Litvinenko died on November 23, 2006, Mr. Goldfarb arranged a press conference and released the sensational deathbed statement accusing Mr. Putin of the poisoning.” Web sites supported by Berezovsky spread the story that Litvinenko was murdered by the FSB.

The effort to link Putin and the FSB to Litvinenko’s death might be a tale designed to cover-up a more serious crime in the making. Polonium-210 is an indication that someone is trying to build a nuclear weapon. Epstein finds reasons to suspect that Litvinenko had, and perhaps Berezovsky has, connections to a Polonium smuggling scheme, and Litvinenko’s death resulted from accidental or careless exposure to Polonium-210.

Who would be trying to build a secret nuclear weapon or perhaps only a “dirty bomb” that would serve to spread some radiation and massive amounts of fear and hysteria? The public has been carefully prepared to suspect Iran. If such a device were exploded somewhere in the United States, Bush, Cheney, and the neocon nazis would have their second new Pearl Harbor to justify their planned attack on Iran.

We know that the Bush regime wants to attack Iran. Despite the NIE report that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program several years ago and despite no signs of a weapons program having been uncovered by IAEA inspectors, Bush, Cheney, and the neocon nazis continue to agitate for striking Iran “before it is too late.” Their politicized military commander in Iraq, Gen. Petraeus, keeps insisting that Iran is training Iraqi insurgents and supplying weapons that are killing US troops. Bush and Cheney themselves have made trips to Europe and the Middle East trying to marshall support for an attack on Iran. Anyone who is not deaf, blind and stupid knows that the Bush regime is doing everything it can to create circumstances that will permit a US attack on Iran.

We know for a fact that the Bush regime created false evidence, lied, and deceived in order to attack Iraq. All the reasons given for the US invasion have proven to be false. The real agenda has never been declared. Yet, five years later the traitors in high office who deceived Americans into a war in behalf of a hidden agenda have not been held accountable. As Agatha Christie said, getting away with one murder makes it easy to commit another.

There is so much that Americans do not know about secret schemes serving undeclared agendas. Those who have attempted to clue in fellow citizens are invariably frustrated, because Americans have been trained to dismiss the messenger who brings news of “false flag” events as a “conspiracy theorist.”

Best-selling author Steve Alten in his recently published book, The Shell Game, attempts to reach Americans with a thriller that mixes fiction with fact. Alten describes a conspiracy, beginning in 2007 and ending in 2012, by a Black Op group in a Republican administration to set off nuclear weapons in two American cities, with planted evidence pointing to Iran. It is a historical thriller predictive of our immediate future by an author who has no illusions about the US Government or the interest groups that control it.

Alten’s book is a first class thriller set in the real world of today. It is a perfect read for Americans who need their dose of reality to be watered down with fiction and delivered as entertainment.

About the video:Historian Dr. Phil Daniele Ganser talked on the swiss tv station U1 about false flag operations and hidden warfare. Here is a small section translated into english - just a quick translation, sorry for any misspellings, it's just for the one of you interested.

28/03/08 "ICH" -- -- During the Vietnam era, the United States eagerly supported the regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, a man who brutally oppressed the Buddhists; yet today our government has risen in defense of the Dalai Lama and Tibet. Has our sordid history finally led to compassion for the people of Tibet? One must wonder which people we want to protect for there are 41 races in Tibet, including Tibetan, Menpa, Luopa, Han Chinese, Hui, Sherpa, Deng, and so on; although by far, the majority are Tibetans. Perhaps the US is reaching out to the Dalai Lama - again?

It seems that the US government excels at propaganda for it continues to win over the very people it has betrayed and caused to be killed; buying their trust, it offers a friendship that is only self-serving. Oblivious to the past havoc wreaked by the CIA in Tibet, the innocent gather around the storm, stare into the eye, ready to be sucked into it. Not too long ago, the Truman administration attempted to use the young Dalai Lama against China's new Communist regime. The CIA offered to provide him financial support as part of the deal. Its subsidies to the Dalai Lama lasted, at an unspecified level, until 1974. However, the CIA officials seem to have misled the Tibetans into thinking they had American support for the establishment of an independent Tibet. They did not.

Once again, the Tibetans are thinking they have the support of the United States. It should be mentioned that such names as Tom Lantos (a Holocaust survivor) endorsed the promotion of a free Tibet. He also promoted the International Campaign for Tibet, a campaign which receives grants from the National Endowment for Democracy – a State Department operation which engages non-suspecting NGOs to openly do what the CIA did/does. Neoconservative queen, Jean Kilpatrick was pushing The Committee of 100 for Tibet with artists such as Richard Gere as unsuspecting fronts[ii]

What is the reason behind America’s sudden interest in Tibet, the Buddhist ideology of 1649 Dalai Lama preserving animal and nature (we certainly could be preserving nature at home) or is it what is under nature? Tibet has the world’s largest reserve of uranium, and in addition to gold and copper, large quantities of oil and gas were discovered in Qiangtang Basin in western China's remote Tibet area[iii]. A friendly Dalai Lama would help reimburse the CIA subsidies, and much more.

There are other more important factors. Israel’s interest is undeniable. In fact, they have been helping this ancient green land with ‘agriculture techniques’ in recent years[iv]. Elie Wiesel, Nobel Laureate and Holocaust survivor, is recruiting fellow Nobel winners to press China on Tibet. Other notables such as Spielberg have already cooperated, and Sarkozy is considering boycotting the Olympics. One has to ask why these humanitarians are not concerned with the well-being of 1.4 million Palestinians described by the UN and the ICRC as being subjected to worst possible human disaster witnessed.

China has always shown reluctance to impose sanctions on Iran. From an Israeli and American perspective, China became a veritable short-term liability (versus a long term power challenging the US) when Iran and China engaged in talks to allow for a military base for China in one of Iran’s Persian Gulf ports. This was in response to Sarkozy making an announcement that France and the UAE were negotiating a deal in which France would have a small base in that region. Such a cooperation between Iran and China would make Iran less vulnerable to an attack by Israel and/or the United States.

Engaging China in a Tibet uprising, threatening the public image it has worked so hard to build around the world (China has far surpassed the United States in Public Diplomacy. During the G.W. Bush presidency, while the world watched in dismay an do-it-alone America that made a blunder at every turn, China, in spite of human rights issues that remain to be resolved, has won ‘hearts and minds’ in South America, Middle East, and Africa. It is attempting to win over its regional neighbors by developing economic, political, and diplomatic relations, and exercising skillful diplomacy) would distract or dissuade it from building alliances with Iran. Iran must be kept isolated at all costs.

Tel-Aviv hopes that Cheney will push Bush to launch a military attack on Iran, just as he persuaded Bush to attack Iraq. Given that the Iraq tactics are old, new ones have to be sought. As such, many experts suspect that a false flag operation would be required to launch an all out war. In October 2006, when Anti-terrorism officials conducted a helicopter survey of New York City's radiation sources in preparation for a so-called "dirty bomb" attack, they came across an unexpected radiation hot spot which has been kept out of the media as it is a political hot spot – A strong radiation spike from the area of the Israeli Embassy. Officials would not comment on why they thought that particular area showed such a stunning peak in radiation[v].

Can America afford another war? Will the world withstand another assault on humanity?

In 1787, George Washington said: “The power under the Constitution will always be in the people. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes, and for a certain limited period, to representatives of their own choosing; and whenever it is executed contrary to their interest, or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled.”

Let us recall our servants who do not represent us, who do not serve our interest, and who are killing in our name.

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is an Iranian-American studying at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. She is a member of World Association of International Studies society, Stanford. Her research focus is US foreign policy towards Iran, Iran’s nuclear program, and influence of lobby groups. She is a peace activist, essayist, radio commentator and public speaker.

28/03/08 "ICH " -- - -In the recently published thriller, The Shell Game, Steve Alten weaves a tale of a neoconservative plot to attack Iran. To overcome resistance, a black op group associated with a Republican administration arranges for nuclear devices to be exploded in two American cities, with planted evidence pointing to Iran. Recent developments make one wonder if fact is following fantasy.

The Bush regime’s propaganda against Iran is going full blast and obviously has a purpose. The foreign press reports that the reason for Cheney’s latest trip abroad is to cajole, threaten, and purchase support for a US attack on Iran.

The Israeli government continues to see an Iranian nuclear weapon on the horizon and to agitate for US action against Iran.

According to John McGlynn in Japan Focus (March 22, 2008), the Bush regime is already attacking Iran with Treasury Department actions to cut off Iran’s banking system from all international banking relationships, thereby preventing Iran from importing and exporting. McGlynn calls the US Treasury’s action a "US declaration of war on Iran."

Cheney’s trip shows that the Bush regime is undeterred by the National Intelligence Estimate’s conclusion that Iran abandoned several years ago any nuclear weapons program that it might have had. The International Atomic Energy Agency has never found evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Despite all the facts and without evidence, the Bush Regime continues to assert that Iran has a nuclear weapons program that warrants an American attack on Iran.

Gen. David Petraeus, commander of US forces in Iraq and a member of the Cheney/neocon team, blamed Easter Sunday’s bombardment of the "secure" Green Zone in Baghdad on Iran. Petraeus says the attack is "in complete violation of promises made by President Ahmadinejad and the other most senior Iranian leaders." Petraeus’s claims are part of the neocon propaganda campaign to build support for an attack on Iran.

Central Command chief Admiral William Fallon is reported to have declared that there would be no attack on Iran on his watch. With his recent resignation effective the end of March, Fallon has been moved out of the picture. According to news reports, Fallon derided Petraeus as a "sycophant" and told him to his face that he considered him to be "an ass-kissing little chickenshit."

That it is Fallon who is gone and the ass-kissing little chickenshit who remains tells you all you need to know about the US military under the Cheney/Bush/neocon regime. It is an ass-kissing, yes boss, military.

On his Web site, University of Michigan professor and Middle East expert Juan Cole has an article by Vanity Fair contributing editor Craig Unger, author of The Fall of the House of Bush. Unger makes the point that the US attack on Iraq was not the result of "mistaken intelligence." It was a direct result of a plot by neoconservative conspirators, who fabricated "evidence" and spread propaganda that deceived Congress, the media, and the American people.

A conspiracy that would launch a war on the basis of forged "intelligence" and false allegations is a conspiracy that believes strongly in its agenda. Such a conspiracy would not be content with only partial achievement of its agenda. As we should all know by now, the neoconservative agenda is for the US to overthrow Iraq, Iran, and Syria at a minimum. As neoconservative Norman Podhoretz has formulated the agenda, the goal is to overthrow the regimes in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan in addition, and to clear Hezbollah out of Lebanon.

The difficulties of securing Iraq and Afghanistan have not dented the neocons’ faith in their agenda, but time might be running out for the neocons if we assume that Bush will step down and not utter the two words – catastrophic emergency – that transform him into a dictator, and that a war weary voting public will not elect "Bomb bomb bomb Iran" McCain.

A McCain presidency would give the neocons four more years to orchestrate an attack on Iran. Jeffery St. Clair in CounterPunch, March 24, notes that Hillary’s vaulting ambition could cause her to split and defeat the Democrats by playing the race card against Obama so that she can run against McCain in four years before she is too old for the game.

A conspiracy willing to launch an invasion of a country on false pretenses would not hesitate to pull off a false flag event if it would further their agenda. The massive human, financial and diplomatic cost of the Iraq invasion is a good indication that neoconservatives are willing for America to pay any price for establishing their agenda of achieving American/Israeli hegemony over the Middle East.

We will likely never know, but a neoconservative false flag operation might lie behind what appears to have been the accidental poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko by a rare and tightly controlled radioactive isotope, Polonium-210. Litvinenko, a former member of KGB counterintelligence, operated in the shadowy world of "security consultants" on a fake passport given to him by the British government. Litvinenko left Russia when his patron, oligarch Boris Berezovsky fled to escape fraud charges.

The British government and websites financed by Berezovsky blamed Litvinenko’s mysterious death on the Russian Federal Security Service, which allegedly sent an agent to put Polonium-210 in Litvinenko’s tea. On its face, the tale is far-fetched, but it served to divert attention from the fact that Polonium-210 had somehow got into private hands.

Where had the Polonium come from? No one knows, but nuclear physicist Gordon Prather noted at the time that Litvinenko had recently been to Israel and that Israel’s nuclear reactors are not subject to international safeguards.

For what purpose was Polonium being smuggled? No one knows, but Prather notes that Polonium-210 has a short shelf-life that would turn any stored weapon into a dud within months.

According to knowledgeable people, Polonium-210 would be useful for a dirty bomb that would do little real damage but would create enough fear and hysteria for the neocons to start another war.

Steve Alten was more alert than the media. He saw what might be the real story behind Litvinenko’s death by Polonium-210. Realizing that fantasy is one route by which Americans can be brought to the facts, and hoping to preclude any such real world event, Alten wrote a thriller predictive of our future between now and 2012.

Paul Craig Roberts a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, has been reporting shocking cases of prosecutorial abuse for two decades. A new edition of his book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, co-authored with Lawrence Stratton, a documented account of how Americans lost the protection of law, is forthcoming from Random House in March, 2008.

The First Fifteen Minutes of September 11thFormer Air Traffic Controller Robin Hordon speaks outon 9/11, NORAD and what should have happened on 9/11.

By Jeremy Baker

Former Air Traffic Controller Robin Hordon

Within three hours of the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Robin Hordon knew it was an inside job. He had been an Air Traffic Controller (ATC) for eleven years before Reagan fired him and hundreds of his colleagues after they went on strike in the eighties. Having handled in-flight emergencies and two actual hijackings in his career, he is well qualified to comment on what NORAD should have been able to achieve in its response to the near simultaneous hijacking of four domestic passenger carriers on the morning of September 11th, 2001.

“There had to be something huge to explain why those aircraft weren’t shot down out of the sky. We have fighters on the ready to handle these situations twenty-four-seven. We have NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) monitors monitoring our skies twenty-four-seven. We have a lot of human beings, civilian and military, who care about doing their jobs.”

I spoke to Mr. Hordon one afternoon at a coffee shop in Bremerton, Washington.

“You have to understand the emotions, the duty, the job of an ATC. We are paid to watch aircraft go across the country.”

It’s clear that Hordon is passionate about the subject. A lot of people are. The dark questions that the attacks have left lingering in the national psyche have been recorded. 49% of New Yorkers believe that the government had something to do with 9/11. Following an interview with Charlie Sheen, a CNN poll revealed that 82% of respondents believed that there was “a government cover-up of 9/11.” Jay Leno asked Bill Maher on The Tonight Show about the fact that 37% of Americans (according to Scribbs-Howard) believe that the government was involved in some way with the attacks (Maher was definitely not one of them).

As far as the “emotions, the duty, the job” of an ATC is concerned, Hordon puts it this way:

“Imagine yourself at a circus, a fair, a crowded sports event. You have in your hand your little child of five or six, you’re amongst hundreds of people and you turn around and see that your child is gone. How do you feel at that moment? You feel panicked. You feel that this is the worst thing possible, so what you do is you engage. When ATCs lose an aircraft, all hell breaks loose. They flip right into motion. We take action and do not wait for other things to happen.”

As a former member of the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization), Hordon’s years as an ATC are particularly relevent to 9/11 researchers.

“I was a certified ATC in Boston west-bound departures, the routing that AA11 and UA175 followed on 9/11. I know it like the back of my hand.”

He even received a letter of commendation for his role in dealing with an actual hijacking. When it became clear that there hadn’t been a systems failure of any kind on the morning of September 11th, Hordon was certain that something had gone terribly wrong within the upper echelons of authority. A pilot (third level air carrier) as well as an ATC, he is well versed on in-flight emergency protocol. He is also adamant that if these procedures had been followed on 9/11 not one of the hijacked planes would have reached their targets.

“I’m sorry but American 11 should have been intercepted over southwest Connecticut—bang, done deal.”

According to Hordon, air emergencies requiring scrambles, or “flushes,” from fighter jets occur 50 to 150 times a year.

“It’s routine. At Otis AFB we would have practice exercises two or three times a year. We’d flush aircraft, get the B-52’s up, get the tankers up, get the fighters up. Just out of Otis there’d be twenty, thirty fighter jets. And on 9/11 there were plenty of fighters as well. They were just diverted over the ocean, tied up in drills, etc.”

The vast majority of air incidents are simple communications or routing failures, common mishaps that are easily remedied. Nonetheless, when a problem does arise, it is treated as an emergency and interceptors are scrambled.

“This is exactly what’s written in our manuals. We alert our immediate supervisors, we get another set of eyes on the scope. We have, two feet away from us, a little button that says ADC, Air Defense Command [nowadays NEADS (Northeast Air Defense Sector)]. Bing, hit the button. ‘Hey, this is me at the Boston Center air space. I just lost a target or I have an erratic target. He is twenty-five miles west of Keene, last reported at such-and-such location.’”

Pilots use similar checklists when responding to problems with their airplanes:

“If I lose an engine in a multi-engine aircraft I know exactly what to do. I start to control the aircraft to fly with one engine, I’ll shut the ailing engine down, I’ll get the aircraft trimmed up. It’s check, check, check.”

Hordon is not persuaded by those who make excuses for the lack of military response on 9/11. U.S. air defenses have been on hair-trigger alert to defend the nation from attack since the early sixties. The idea that, on the morning of 9/11, there was an inexplicable wave of incompetence on the part of his former FAA “brothers in arms” offends him deeply.

“The pilots are in their ready rooms, the planes are in open-ended hangars. You have frontline players, pilots and controllers. I’m there, I’m watching. The pilot is there, he’s flying. We have direct air defense command communications. That’s the way it’s been for fifty years.”

The unfathomable delays seen in military action on 9/11 are inconceivable to those who have painstakingly investigated the matter—and for a man who worked for years keeping air travel over the U.S. safe.

“Military pilots would have their asses off the ground faster than you could imagine. I know how quickly our systems can respond. Why would you design a system that responds slowly to an emergency?”

Claims by authorities that, once a hijacked aircraft’s transponders have been turned off, the plane becomes virtually invisible to radar, is another sore point for Hordon.

“Bottom line, these aircraft were always radar monitored, we were always in communication with them, even if they were hijacked. The only way you can lose an aircraft these days is for the plane to flat out blow up.”

Since any genuine air attack would not likely announce itself as such, NORAD radar has to be able to detect anything. But there’s nothing stealthy about an enormous Boeing passenger liner, whether its transponder is operating properly or not.

“That aircraft is represented on their radar scope from the time it takes off to the time it lands. Even little puddle-jumpers out of our local airports. NORAD tracks all these aircraft. They have the world’s most sophisticated radar.”

After eleven eventful years as an ATC, Hordon naturally reacted with shock when he first heard that fifty years of tried and true in-flight emergency protocol was abruptly altered in June of 2001, just two months before the attacks.

“Rumsfeld put a third party in between the ATC and the Air Defense Controller responsible for scrambling interceptors —the Pentagon.”

He speculates that

“the phone calls went from the FAA to the Pentagon and were not answered. Therefore the Pentagon never reached down to the ADC base to release the aircraft. The Boston Center’s ATCs got so frustrated with the non-answer from the military that they finally said, ‘get these guys going anyways.’ That’s the way it’s been for fifty years. We scramble aircraft. We don’t wait for OK’s from third or fourth parties.”

The no-show status of the U.S. military on the morning of September 11th, 2001, has understandably become the single most compelling point that 9/11 researchers, writers and activists use to support their claims of complicity on the part of the U.S government (and its military and intelligence apparatus) in the attacks. When even those who condemn “conspiracy theory” in regard to 9/11 have questioned the military’s conduct that morning, it’s clear that this anomaly is worthy of intense concern and diligent investigation. Whatever the case may be, there are no doubts that history’s largest and most technologically advanced military was apparently caught completely off guard by four huge hijacked passenger jets that were in the air for almost two hours on the crystal clear morning of 9/11.

9/11 researchers have spent years speculating about what exactly did happen in the cockpits of the hijacked jets on 9/11. Theories run the gamut, from duplicate aircraft taking over the flight plans of the hijacked planes to passenger jets being remotely commandeered in mid-air. Naturally, the technical complexities involved in operating a huge commercial passenger jet can only be fully conveyed by someone with extensive aviation training and experience.

“For years, they have been improving what the common person will call an autopilot. The modern term is a flight director. You can program a flight director basically for your entire flight, before and after you take off.”

Flight directors—high-tech navigational computers—are used in commercial aircraft because they are always sensing every factor that affects an aircraft’s flight (wind speed and direction, fuel weight, atmospheric conditions, etc.) and instantly make the adjustments necessary to sustain the most efficient and economic operation of the plane.

“The Boeing 707 Series, I believe, were the last series of aircraft built where you actually controlled the plane using wires or cables. There are no cables anymore. What we have now are electronic or hydraulic sensors that transmit information to servos and other control devices that apply pressure to the control surfaces.”

The fact that the operation of modern aircraft is primarily computerized essentially makes the controls hackable, either from onboard or, if the proper receivers are installed in the plane, from a remote location.

“Internally the aircraft had to have a separate receiver unit built into it; separate windows of access into the flight director and an ability to disengage the manual controls in the aircraft and take it over with all of the pre-determined information.”

Hordon adds an important caveat:

if a flight director was redirected during a flight, the new flight-plan would not necessarily be communicated to those on the ground.

Obviously, the training required to alter a flight director’s routing is substantial. But, as a student pilot learns to operate increasingly sophisticated aircraft, this knowledge becomes available as needed. Hordon believes that if the hijackers really did take control of the cockpits this may well have been what they were studying in the flight schools they attended.

Much has been made by 9/11 researchers about the seemingly limitless incompetence of the 9/11 hijackers as pilots—amateur aviators who could barely operate light aircraft. This odd fact has led many conspiracy advocates to speculate that the nineteen alleged hijackers may have been merely a gang of patsies or “Oswalds,” groomed by their handlers to take the fall for the attacks without their knowledge or involvement. Some researchers even speculate that these “terrorists” never actually boarded the planes at all. Although this theory may sound outlandish to many, it is however supported by the astonishing fact that none of the hijackers’ names appear on any of the published passenger manifests. But Hordon believes that, if the hijackers really were on the planes and did indeed take over the cockpits as reported, their ability to actually fly the aircraft to their targets is a distinct possibility.

“If anybody thinks that these flight directors weren’t sophisticated enough to be programmed to go to these exact, specific coordinates—WTC One and Two—they’re wrong. It has nothing to do with pilot competence.”

Hordon believes that it would be relatively easy for the hijackers to reroute a commercial jet’s flight director to hit any location with great accuracy, as long as they had acquired the proper training. This is apparently one of the few accurate scenarios portrayed in the Hollywood movie Flight 93, a film Hordon otherwise dismisses as elaborate propaganda designed to deceive the public and sell the official story. This point is intriguing when you consider the fact that a book recently published by the editors of Popular Mechanics magazine—Debunking 9/11 Myths—specifically claims that the hijackers of UA Flight 93 stormed the cockpit, took over the controls and drove the plane by sight, a method that PM and its army of expert technicians and specialists have nicknamed “point and go.” Besides representing a bizarre departure from Hordon’s expert analysis, PM’s “point and go” theory also contradicts the scenario dramatized in Flight 93. Although it’s difficult for many people to believe that such a lack of consensus exists among the “experts” who support the official story, this is really just one of many examples where this kind of unfathomable contradiction has occurred.

Some theorists have speculated that homing beacons may have been transmitting signals to Flights 11 and 175 from within the Twin Towers—all the hijacked planes had to do was follow these signals to their destinations. Although he doesn’t necessarily subscribe to this theory, Hordon elaborates on it as a possibility:

“When a commercial jet approaches its destination, the flight director interfaces with transmitters located at the end of a runway and makes the adjustments. All the pilots have to do is sit back, monitor the controls and watch the airplane land itself, even in “zero-zero” conditions [no ceiling height or visibility].”

This combination of computerized onboard controls and what is essentially a homing signal from the flight’s destination is called “coupling,” a technological dance performed by aircraft thousands of times a day at airports all around the world.

Often criticized by detractors for speculating about the use of “Buck Rogers”-style aviation technology in the attacks, 9/11 researchers are nonetheless vindicated by Hordon who believes that such speculation may not be so outlandish after all. Referring to elaborate experiments done by the military decades ago that involved the remote control commandeering of aircraft, Hordon responds:

“In the seventies, they were extremely sophisticated with aircraft. Could they commandeer an aircraft in mid-flight right now? Absolutely, in a heartbeat. Clearly the technology is there. It’s been there for a long time.”

It only seems reasonable that if this technology were the most efficient, reliable and discrete means to guarantee the success of such an elaborate operation, the conspirators wouldn’t hesitate to make full use of it.

The question of whether or not the hijackers piloted the planes themselves or if control of the aircraft was taken completely out of their hands by operatives from a remote location has always been central to 9/11 researchers. But, to Robin Hordon, it’s, at best, a moot point:

“My answer to you is it’s irrelevant. It’s irrelevant whether the hijackers were real and were actually in the aircraft or whether the aircraft was commandeered by external forces. It could have been either one. One way or another, somebody other than U.S. certified airline pilots took over that aircraft, whether it be a terrorist sitting in the cockpit or someone outside the cockpit.”

Whatever scenarios Hordon may consider in regard to Flights 11, 175 and 93, he is adamant that 9/11 researchers shouldn’t rest until they’ve gotten to the bottom of the alleged crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. To many, the idea that a military jet or missile—not Flight 77—actually struck the Pentagon is a bizarre and almost inconceivable assertion. But for many 9/11 researchers, it is a central and compelling focus.

“The particular maneuver that was called upon for this huge Boeing aircraft, OK, it’s highly suspicious that a flight director could pull that one off. We also know that it’s highly suspicious that if it were the pilot that people say was operating the aircraft, we know that that guy couldn’t pull that off. That was completely impossible.”

A common notion to which many defenders of the official account cling (including such notables as Noam Chomsky) is the idea that any conspiracy as vast as 9/11 would have had to involve hundreds, perhaps thousands of people, all in-the-know and willing to go to the grave with their secrets. But well researched claims—that many sizable covert operations have indeed been kept from the public in the past; that state of the art technology can drastically reduce the number of people required for any given “op,” and that systemic “compartmentalization” of duties can effectively exploit many people’s involvement without their knowledge—have convincingly refuted this assertion. In addition, the ability of higher-ups to intimidate and silence potential whistleblowers after the fact is formidable. Naturally, Mr. Hordon has a thing or two to say on the subject.

“I think we all have to agree that, one way or another, the U.S. military was involved in the attacks. The advantage that Rumsfeld had is that he can classify, reshape, make available, make unavailable any information that he wants, at any time and deny that information to the public for any reason, especially national security.”

Hordon believes that one facet of the plan that the conspirators could not control was the individual integrity of the civilians in the FAA—dedicated professionals who would not likely remain silent if they had witnessed something unusual during the attacks. Number one on Hordon’s list are the air traffic controllers: “What part of this whole thing is missing? Is it not the voice tapes from the civilian ATC’s? They had to devise a way to take the loose lips group, the civilian guys, and disengage them. If they are allowed to testify exactly as to their normal protocol behavior, they’re going to prove that the military were the culpable ones.” When he was in the FAA, Hordon was certified as the operator in his facility tasked to secure relevant data after an air emergency; if not entirely because of public safety concerns, certainly for liability reasons. “Whenever we had an incident, an emergency, on-air trouble, some type of a near ‘mid-air’ or a breakdown in aviation rules, we would immediately take the voice tapes and secure them. We would immediately take the radar data on that controller’s scope that day and secure them. Whenever there was an incident, all of the information, all of it was secured. Period.”

Despite this rigid protocol, there have been shocking accounts of ATC records being seized shortly after the attacks and kept far from public scrutiny. Hordon believes that these ATC recordings have either been destroyed or mutilated.

“The reason that they’re not giving us this early-on information is because they want to paint a picture of confusion, and they had to somehow get the civilian eye-witnesses out of it.”

Although the 9/11 Commission, desperate to deflect the public’s attention away from official quarters, scapegoated the FAA for incompetence in regard to the attacks, Hordon believes that the real confusion originated in the Pentagon, a theory that jibes well with the timely and suspicious change in air defense protocol mentioned above.

“The FAA has given us the computerized information about the aircraft being tracked. What the FAA has not given us is the internal tapes from the sectors in the Boston Center who were controlling this aircraft.”

If there were one point Robin Hordon would like to impress most upon 9/11 Truth researchers and activists it would be that the truth about the non-performance of U.S. air defenses on 9/11 lies in a careful examination of the first few minutes after the planes were known to have been hijacked.

“The first fifteen minutes are the key. I have done the math. If we had scrambled some aircraft five or six minutes after we saw this huge deviation, the fighters from Otis would have intercepted American 11 over southwestern Connecticut or just south of Albany, NY. The federal government and the military, for extremely serious reasons, are keeping the public focused on after American 11 hits the tower. But the real focus for 9/11 researchers should be what NORAD was doing five minutes after American 11 lost its transponder and went off course.”

Whatever criticism Hordon may have for NORAD and the Pentagon, it certainly doesn’t extend to the individuals on the frontlines of our nation’s civil defense:

“These are military fighter pilots. These are good guys. They figure stuff out. What do you think the pilots are doing? Ordering coffee and donuts? No. They are up there, their blood is pumping, they are thinking one thing: ‘My country is being invaded. This is why I stand on the ready in the waiting room down at Otis AFB; so that I can get up and defend my country.’ Do you think they’re going to get on the tail of American 11 when it was heading straight for the WTC and let it hit? No. What they’re going to do is say ‘OK, there’s going to be some bodies and shrapnel…boom.’ They’re going to take that risk.”

One of Hordon’s more ambitious proposals for the 9/11 Truth movement is that a support network be developed for the aid and protection of its single most important resource, whistleblowers.

“What the 9/11 movement should do is band together and develop safe lives for whistleblowers.” Legal counsel, moral support, even physical protection could do much to inspire those who are considering stepping forward with potentially explosive insider testimony about the attacks.

Hordon would also like to see young people being told the truth about politics, history and the world in their schools. “The people who are our greatest assets are the kids in high school. If the military is taking advantage of the susceptibility of high school kids to seduce them to kill people, the peace movement needs to offer alternatives. We need to make available, at the end of the high school years, alternatives of thought in regard to the world’s economy and control apparatus.” Hordon’s plan, though idealistic, is not without a certain opportunism:

“I want to go to high school kids because it’s a two for one proposition. First, their ears are wide open. They’re skeptical about this government right now and they’re plugged into the internet. Second, if we give them material to bring home, it winds up on the kitchen table. And what happens when parents find contraband that’s come into the house? They read it. It’s two for one.”

Many 9/11 activists believe that their work on issues related to the attacks has greater potential for true social transformation than any other single issue, and Hordon emphatically agrees.

“I think that this 9/11 thing is the quintessential opportunity to expose all of the infecting poisons; more than Iran Contra weapons for hostages, more than rampant militarism, more than Watergate, more than Enron, more than the dark side of the world’s financial institutions, more than any other similar kind of thing. I think that this is pretty much their last gasp, and the reason is very simple; the internet. We’re going to catch’em.”

Activists with a sense of humor are always a breath of fresh air. After his stint as an ATC, Hordon worked for years at the comedy club Catch a Rising Star in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Something must have rubbed off:

“We have two parties in this country; we have republicans and we have republicans dressed up in blue drag. And when we get the blue outer clothing off of the fake democrats, they stand there in their red Armani underwear.”

Hordon respects humor as a formidable weapon for activists. As an artistic coordinator for up and coming comedians, he once worked with some of the most talented and successful comics of our time including Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David. Some of the political comics he once coached are regulars on Air America Radio. Of the reigning powers-that-be, he has this to say:

“They know they’re done with 9/11. They know they’re cooked. They’re just throwing boxes of nails in the road behind their car as it speeds away and they’re hoping that all our tires get flattened. But it’s not happening. They know they’re pretty much done.”

Grounded and well informed, Robin Hordon is not a typical pie-in-the-sky progressive, and he likes what he sees happening around him.

“There’s so much good work being done. There’s such a cool pattern now and there’s so many kids coming up who know not to believe the stories they’re being told.”

His greatest hope is that these young movers and shakers shun the roads previously taken by their less politically savvy forebears.

“Sixty percent of our elected officials are millionaires. Until we change that, we are going to struggle to make our democracy better. And I think that, you now, democracies are OK. I think it’s a pretty good plan. I think we should try to get one.”

The show archive includes the May 7, 2007 show on 9/11 Truth with Former Air Traffic Controller Robin Hordon andDavid Ray Griffin, author of Debunking 9/11 Debunking -An Answer to Popular Mechanics and the Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory which draws heavily from Robin Hordon's insights in the first chapter.

Here is a statement that Robin Hordon wrote for patriotsquestion911.com

"I was an FAA Air Traffic Controller from 1970 - 1981. In 1981, I was one of 15,000 FAA air traffic controllers who went on strike and one of the 12,000 fired for going on strike, a strike that was primarily based on our complaints about safety and working conditions within the FAA, which are still seen today.

During my time as an Air Traffic Controller, I worked at the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center in Nashua, NH, and I was certified in the air traffic sector where American Airlines Flight 11 became an "IN-FLIGHT-EMERGENCY" before being declared a "hijack" on 9/11.

In my 11-year FAA career, I worked in the development of "procedures and airspace design", including some military operations, and was part of the team which trained other Air Traffic Controllers and transitioned the FAA from its old broadband radar and simple flight data processors into the RDP (Radar Data Processing) and computerized radar displays.

I was a Facility Training Instructor and was certified to create transcripts from audio tapes, to interpret radar data in tracking aircraft from computer files, and to analyze computer tracking data, all of which would combine to "tell the story" of air traffic incidents. I was also the main creator of the Boston Center Profile Descent and Metering Program for Boston Logan airport.

And while "on the boards", I personally worked one commercial airliner hijacking and assisted on another.

I received several Letters of Commendation for my work, including one where my piloting experience was instrumental in saving the lives of two people on board an aircraft suffering an "IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCY" in which the aircraft had a total loss of electrical power while in the clouds. Our air traffic controller team ordered the scrambling of suitable military aircraft and directed the intercept which successfully led the helpless and lost aircraft down to a safe landing in "socked in" weather conditions.

Several times each year, practice exercises were conducted on how to handle high speed scrambles and group departures called "flushes" all in conjunction with military exercises and NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command). Out of Otis Air Force Base alone, twenty to thirty jet fighters would scramble and then later return.

In addition to my career as an Air Traffic Controller, I have a great deal of other experience in aviation. I was a Certified Commercial Pilot and accumulated 1600 hours total time in light aircraft; qualified in Single-Engine Land, Multi-Engine Land, Single-Engine Sea, and Glider. I was also a Certified Flight Instructor and Certified Ground Instructor. And prior to my becoming an Air Traffic Controller, I passed the Flight Engineer Basic exam focused on the Boeing 727 and accumulated over 2000 hours of aircraft maintenance, repair and rebuilding time.

I knew within hours of the attacks on 9/11/2001 that it was an inside job. Based on my 11-year experience as an FAA Air Traffic Controller in the busy Northeast corridor, including hundreds of hours of training, briefings, air refuelings, low altitude bombing drills, being part of huge military exercises, daily military training exercises, interacting on a routine basis directly with NORAD radar personnel, and based on my own direct experience dealing with in-flight emergency situations, including two instances of hijacked commercial airliners, I state unequivocally; There is absolutely no way that four large commercial airliners could have flown around off course for 30 to 60 minutes on 9/11 without being intercepted and shot completely out of the sky by our jet fighters unless very highly placed people in our government and our military wanted it to happen.

It is important for people to understand that scrambling jet fighters to intercept aircraft showing the signs of experiencing “IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCIES” such as going off course without authorization, losing a transponder signal and/or losing radio contact is a common and routine task executed jointly between the FAA and NORAD controllers. The entire “national defense-first responder” intercept system has many highly-trained civilian and military personnel who are committed and well-trained to this task. FAA and NORAD continuously monitor our skies and fighter planes and pilots are on the ready 24/7 to handle these situations. Jet fighters typically intercept any suspect plane over the United States within 10 - 15 minutes of notification of a problem.

This type of "immediate, high speed, high priority and emergency" scramble had been happening regularly approximately 75 - 150 times per year for ten years. In the same ten years, there were ZERO "low speed, delayed reaction, and low priority" hijacking scrambles reported, which means that the only time interceptors were ever scrambled for ten years before 9/11, they were using the high speed immediate scrambles. The system was well tuned and ready before June 2001. However, the "emergency scramble" is NOT what was used on 9/11/2001...it was the "laissez fair" scramble for a hijacking that had to get Pentagon approval before departing…and there was none forthcoming.

I have the deepest and most sincere respect and sadness at the loss of so many lives on 9/11. With no disrespect towards the surviving family members still feeling the horrors surrounding the attacks on 9/11, I see the events of September 11th as being a symptom of a far bigger problem. A problem that Dwight David Eisenhower had brought to our attention as he left office in the 1950's where he warned this country about two significant elements of our economy looming above us: The Military Industrial Complex, and the Military Industrial Congress. 9/11 served the goals of both of those elements but our government and military failed to serve and protect its citizens.

In my fourth decade within the Peace Movement and now the first decade in the 9/11 Truth Movement, I can now clearly see that General Eisenhower was absolutely correct and that the military-corporation-political-economical cabal has indeed gone out of control.

I believe that 9/11 was what is known as a "False Flag Operation" in which a country inflicts casualties upon itself, and then blames it on an enemy that they want to go to war against. It is one more instance in the United States’ long history of using "False Flag Operations" and blatant propaganda to ramp-up hostile emotions towards an enemy in a population otherwise resistant to going to war. The destruction of the battleship USS Maine in Havana harbor, which led to the Spanish-American War, allowing the attack on Pearl Harbor to occur, the declassified 1960's plan Operation Northwoods, which was going to be used as a pretext for going to war with Cuba, the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, which justified the war in Viet Nam, the planted story about babies being taken from incubators and killed by Iraqi soldiers to help justify the first Gulf War, and now, the attacks on 9/11/2001 being used to justify the current war in Iraq, were all used to manipulate the "warring emotions" within U.S. citizens so that they would come to support this country going to war against this "new enemy". And in all of these wars, everyone in this decadent cabal shares in the financial profits associated with war, and, of course, share in none of the pain and deaths associated with war. Bob Dylan says it best in his unheralded, yet seminal song "Masters of War".

Four decades of experiencing the John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Robert F. Kennedy assassinations, the Vietnam lies, the Watergate saga, the Iran-Contra scandals, stolen elections and the conglomerization and ensuing control of the mainstream media, instructed me that this was going to be a long battle to uncover the truth about who was behind the attacks on 9/11/2001. That I can show how Rumsfeld's Military reshaped interceptor protocols so that 9/11 could happen without the airliners being shot from the sky, is but a small bit of evidence that is flooding past the Bush regime, the U.S. Military and the mainstream media’s best efforts to continue the cover-up of their callous and deathly malfeasances.

Article at Prison Planet- Boston Air Traffic Controller Says 9/11 An Inside Job Knew people in FAA on day of hijackings who said intercept procedures should have been enacted as normal by Paul Joseph Watson

Before 9/11, no transponder had ever become inactive, and so the military and FAA didn't have any experience on how to track planes with their transponders off. Right?

Well, a Miami-Herald article from September 14, 2001, states:

The transponder [on Flight 77] went off about 9 a.m., the company said.

At that moment, the flight would have been under the control of the Indianapolis Air Route Traffic Control Center, one of 20 regional centers that track flights between airports.

The trouble should have been instantly noticeable, traffic controllers say.

Flight 77, like other planes, at first showed up on radar screens as a short solid line, with a readout that identifies the plane and gives its altitude and speed. When the transponder shuts down, the short line vanishes. The speed number goes away, too.

"It's just something that catches your eye,'' one controller says.

And it's not that unusual. Transponders fail from time to time; commercial aircraft are required to carry a spare. Although it isn't clear what happened in the case of Flight 77, a controller's first move typically would be to contact the pilot, and tell them the transponder wasn't working.

The official hijacking protocols provide that the loss of transponder signal be treated as a "no radio" emergency. On 9/11, that is exactly what happened, at least for some of the flights (The protocols also state: "The NORAD control facility shall be advised if the hijacked aircraft is squawking a different transponder code". In other words, the moment a plane stops broadcasting the normal transponder code, NORAD is immediately notified).

As former air traffic controller Robin Hordon, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says:

It is important for people to understand that scrambling jet fighters to intercept aircraft showing the signs of experiencing “IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCIES” such as going off course without authorization, losing a transponder signal and/or losing radio contact is a common and routine task executed jointly between the FAA and NORAD controllers. The entire “national defense-first responder” intercept system has many highly-trained civilian and military personnel who are committed and well-trained to this task. FAA and NORAD continuously monitor our skies and fighter planes and pilots are on the ready 24/7 to handle these situations. Jet fighters typically intercept any suspect plane over the United States within 10 - 15 minutes of notification of a problem.

This type of "immediate, high speed, high priority and emergency" scramble had been happening regularly approximately 75 - 150 times per year for ten years. In the same ten years, there were ZERO "low speed, delayed reaction, and low priority" hijacking scrambles reported, which means that the only time interceptors were ever scrambled for ten years before 9/11, they were using the high speed immediate scrambles.

On 9/11, Flight 77 was in fact tracked on radar, and could have been intercepted with fighter jets. However, the plane was allowed to go on a joy-ride all over the country with its transponder off for three-quarters of an hour. As the above-quoted Miami-Herald article states:

Forty-five minutes. That's how long American Airlines Flight 77 meandered through the air headed for the White House, its flight plan abandoned, its radar beacon silent.

* * *

Who was watching in those 45 minutes?

"That's a question that more and more people are going to ask,'' said one controller in Miami. "What the hell went on here? Was anyone doing anything about it? Just as a national defense thing, how are they able to fly around and no one go after them?''

Even with the transponder silent, the plane should have been visible on radar, both to controllers who handle cross-continent air traffic and to a Federal Aviation Administration command center outside of Washington, according to air traffic controllers.

The FAA, which handles air traffic control, would not discuss the track of Flight 77 or what happened in air-control centers while it was in flight. Neither would American Airlines.

***

But even if the plane remained silent, controllers could still find it -- by switching their screen display to the old-fashioned radar that bounces a signal off the plane's metal skin.

***

Military jets are routinely scrambled in the case of hijackings and "runners,'' planes that do not answer or do not heed air traffic controllers. But FAA officials would not say when controllers detected the errant Flight 77 or whether any fighter jets were able to get into the air to confront it.

Fighter jets are based nearby, in Virginia, and could have reached the White House within minutes, aviation sources say.

Dick Cheney also monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon (confirmed here).

Similarly, an ABC News article states:

"Controllers at the Boston Center knew American Airlines Flight 11, which departed at 7:59 a.m. ET from Boston for its flight to Los Angeles, was hijacked 30 minutes before it crashed. They tracked it to New York on their radar scopes. 'I watched the target of American 11 the whole way down,' said Boston controller Mark Hodgkins. "

And air traffic controllers and others tracked Flight 175.

Indeed, radar data declassified in 2006 shows that the planes were tracked on radar virtually their entire flight, and that altitude was known for the planes during most of their flights.

And, as recounted by a high-level Secret Service agent:

"Through monitoring radar and activating an open line with the FAA, the Secret Service was able to receive real time information about . . . two hijacked aircraft as they approached Washington, D.C. "

Norad Admits Planes Show Up on Radar Even with Transponders Turned Off

Even Neads, the Northeastern sector of Norad, admits that the hijacked planes would have appeared on radar as dashes even after the transponders had been turned off:

Because they had been informed its transponder was off, [Neads] knew to look for a tiny dash instead of the usual dot.

A similar report states:

NEADS Staff Sergeant Larry Thornton says, “Once we were called by the FAA, we could find split-second hits on what we thought we were looking for. . . We were looking for little dash marks . . . .”

But the government claims that it could not locate the hijacked planes because the skies were crowded with other planes, and the military air traffic controllers could not find the planes among all of the plane signals. As NEADS' Thornton said:

"But the area was so congested and it was incredibly difficult to find. We were looking for little dash marks in a pile of clutter and a pile of aircraft on a two-dimensional scope.” Each fluorescent green pulsating dot on their radar scopes represents an airplane, and there are thousands currently airborne, especially over the busy northeast US.

However, the hijacked planes flew in many areas which were not high-traffic areas.

Moreover, it makes no sense that air traffic controllers could not focus their radar scopes solely on airplanes without transponder signals. In other words, let's say a Cuban jet flew onto the East Coast of the United States without any transponder signal. Would Norad say "Sorry, we lost the bad guy's nuclear-armed fighter jet amidst all the commuter flights"?

That makes no sense.

Air traffic control radar -- or at least military radar -- must, with the push of a button, be able to use computer programming to hide all data for planes which have been accounted for as normal, civilian airplanes. In other words, those with working transponder signals. Even if air traffic controllers have to switch from secondary to primary radar, there must be a function for the computer to remove from primary radar signals which include transponder data.

If that were not the case, America's trillion-dollar defense system would be rendered useless.

--------------------------------And the plot thickens...please, please keep digging for all informative articles you run across that pertain to 911 because it's helping to expose their official story as more bogus by the day. Let's keep it up.

Logged

John 3:16 teaches us: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

John 14:6 says: "I am the way the truth and the life; NO MAN cometh unto the Father BUT BY ME."

DALLAS -- American Airlines canceled more than 900 flights Thursday to fix faulty wiring in hundreds of jets, marking the third straight day of mass groundings as company executives offered profuse apologies and travel vouchers to calm angry customers.

American, the nation's largest carrier, has now scrubbed more than 2,400 flights since Tuesday, when federal regulators warned that nearly half its planes could violate a safety regulation designed to prevent fires.

That's more than one in three flights canceled over the last three days.

Daniel Garton, an executive vice president of American, said cancellations could extend into Friday.

A return to normal operations depends on how quickly mechanics can inspect and fix the wire bundles. Airline spokesman Tim Wagner said late Wednesday afternoon that 60 planes had been cleared to fly, 119 were being worked on, and 121 planes had not yet been inspected.

The fallout could be seen at airport ticket counters, where frustrated customers bickered with American employees, and on the stock market, where shares of American's parent company tumbled more than 11 percent Wednesday.

American estimates that more than 100 passengers would have been on each of those canceled flights. That means a quarter-million people have been inconvenienced this week.

Airline executives said they thought they had fixed the wiring two weeks ago, when they canceled more than 400 flights to inspect and in some cases fix the shielding around the wires in their MD-80 aircraft.

But this week, Federal Aviation Administration inspectors, who have been conducting stepped-up surveys of airline compliance with safety rules called airworthiness directives, said 15 of 19 American jets they examined flunked. That left the airline no choice but to ground all 300 of its MD-80s, the most common jet in American's 655-plane fleet.

"We have obviously failed to complete the airworthiness directive to the precise standards that the FAA requires, and I take full responsibility for that," Gerard Arpey, American's chairman and chief executive, said at an industry event in California.

Back at American's headquarters in Fort Worth, Garton apologized for the snafu and vowed the airline would fix the problem this time.

"We simply cannot put our customers through this again," he said.

Garton added that for American, "this certainly couldn't have come at a worse time." The airline faces record fuel prices and fear of a recession, and analysts forecast that its parent, AMR Corp., lost more than $300 million in the first three months of the year.

American declined to say how much it would spend on $500 travel vouchers and hotel rooms for stranded travelers and overtime for mechanics, or how much revenue it would lose by putting some displaced customers on other airlines. But Garton said it would be "significant."

Perhaps worried about that cost, investors on Wednesday sent AMR shares down $1.15 to $9.17.

American's problem -- and Alaska Airlines' cancellation of 14 flights Wednesday to inspect its nine MD-80s -- stems from an FAA order in 2006 covering the bundling of wires in the backup power system for the fuel pump of the MD-80. The FAA says improperly bundled wires could rub, leading to an electrical short or even fire.

American officials said the safety of their planes was never jeopardized, and the FAA said no serious incidents have been blamed on poorly bundled wires.

Some passengers took a jaundiced view toward American's promise to fix the problems.

Kathy Neer of Santa Fe, N.M., was caught up in both waves of cancellations to and from a vacation in Paris. She and her husband were stranded in Dallas on Tuesday on the final leg of their journey home. American gave the Neers a voucher for a hotel room and seats on another flight home Wednesday.

"They say our flight is leaving at 3:55 p.m., but do you think we trust them?" Neer said. "After being burned twice, we're a little skeptical."

A return to normal operations depends on how quickly mechanics can inspect and fix the wire bundles. Airline spokesman Tim Wagner said late Wednesday afternoon that 60 planes had been cleared to fly, 119 were being worked on, and 121 planes had not yet been inspected.

Maybe I am over analyzing but we know the globalist send out messages via MSM and they said 119 are being worked on...reverse that it is 911.

Quote

The fallout could be seen at airport ticket counters, where frustrated customers bickered with American employees, and on the stock market, where shares of American's parent company tumbled more than 11 percent Wednesday.

The globalists use numerology as well.

Again, maybe I am over analyzing it-- could be just one more way to restrict our travels in the country that much more.

Logged

"Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace." ~ Rod Serling"Cops today are nothing but an armed tax collector" ~ Frank Serpico"To be normal, to drink Coca-Cola and eat Kentucky Fried Chicken is to be in a conspiracy against yourself.""People that don't want to make waves sit in stagnant waters."

I think the airlines didn't either grease someone's palms and now they are being punished or, as was said already, they are re-wiring the planes so that in the case of martial law, we will not be able to escape via airplanes. If we do, they can electronically pop them like red balloons in the sky. Since when does "big business" of any kind, shut down their operations for the "good of the people". They must think we have been playing too many hours of "Rock Band"!

Does anybody else find this story strange? A multi-billion dollar airline suddenly discovers there's electrical problems on hundreds of it's planes, especially when fully functioning planes are vital for a profitable airline?

I have been thinking this since the first reports came to light. This is extremely suspicious! Is anyone on 911 truth sites posting any articles on this?

I have a bad feeling a really bad feeling about this!

It could be the other way around. They may have discovered a vulnerability. Bear in mind that people who don't believe committing mass murder of innocent people tend to outnumber the mass-murders.

I've been posting in various places about the possibility of electronic hijacking by tampering with planes. Can't say I post to any Truther(TM) sites. I am banned from almost all of them. AAMOF, that kind of electronic hijacking was one of the offending suggestions I made shortly before being banned from the STJ911 forum.

Couldn't they rewire planes without making a big spectacle by grounding all their planes? Ship a few off to be rewired and put them back into maintenance. Or hire operatives to work as "mechanics" and ground them for "maintenance".

Couldn't they rewire planes without making a big spectacle by grounding all their planes? Ship a few off to be rewired and put them back into maintenance. Or hire operatives to work as "mechanics" and ground them for "maintenance".

Not everything is a conspiracy.

I Have to agree - The big difference between this and the WTC getting "remodeled" is that there was no news coverage at all about the WTC.

If there was something to this I'm sure it wouldn't be all over the news.

Just had this thought cross my cranium: What if they're about to implement some really Orwellian procedures for the TSA, and this is to get everyone scared of, inconvenienced by, or pissed off at the Airlines. (I mean, MORE Orwellian than it already is). If you're now distracted worrying about whether your plane is going to hold up, you're really not gonna notice that TSA baton-cam shoved up your ass.

ya know what's sad? The sheeple will forget about all this in a few weeks and American will be bustling like usual. It's sickening how dumb the majority has gotten. Falseflag? big possibility. The pope will be here in 2 weeks, Israel is gonna be active with a "military drill", Our navy is stationed in the persian gulf off the coast of Iran and Taiwan is supposed to decide weather or not to apply to the UN under the name taiwan. I think Taiwan is supposed to decide weather or not to declare independance, but I need to double check on that. Very good find AP, Kudos to ya.

Logged

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."~Thomas Jefferson

FASCIST STATES NATIONALIZE EVERYTHING!!!! THE AIRLINE INDUSTRYIS IN THEIR CROSSHAIRS!!! IF WE DON'T STOP THEM, SOON OUR AIRLINES WILL BE A THING OF THE PAST, JUST LIKE OUR NATIONAL PRIDE, ETC., ETC. IF YOU CAN'T SEE MARTIAL LAW COMING, YOU NEED TO PAY MORE ATTENTION.

FASCIST STATES NATIONALIZE EVERYTHING!!!! THE AIRLINE INDUSTRYIS IN THEIR CROSSHAIRS!!! IF WE DON'T STOP THEM, SOON OUR AIRLINES WILL BE A THING OF THE PAST, JUST LIKE OUR NATIONAL PRIDE, ETC., ETC. IF YOU CAN'T SEE MARTIAL LAW COMING, YOU NEED TO PAY MORE ATTENTION.

Do you expect to see news stories about airline federalization much the way they're trying with the Fed? I sure am now. So, heads up..... even if this is what this is, I still stick to my smokescreen hypothesis. That, at worst, would just be a great PERK for the TSA.

Actually I am pretty convinced it is because they are bleeding cash like crazy - and using this as a pretext to ground their flights - in just the last week three airliners went bankrupt due to high fuel costs - namely Aloha airlines (60 years in business) - ATA Airlines, and SkyBus.

I don't think that AA gives a rats patuty about their wiring until they were starting to loose serious money with the cost of fuel - to accompany this they suddenly need to start grounding and checking wiring all over the place.

I have a friend that works at John Wayne airport(in O.C., Calif.)for American Airlines. He said the issue is tying down and securing some landing gear wiring. Problem is the mechanics were given the wrong instructions on how it was to be done. So every plane has to be redone. Thats why a two day job is turning into a 5 day job. No conspiracy here-next thread!

Just had this thought cross my cranium: What if they're about to implement some really Orwellian procedures for the TSA, and this is to get everyone scared of, inconvenienced by, or pissed off at the Airlines. (I mean, MORE Orwellian than it already is). If you're now distracted worrying about whether your plane is going to hold up, you're really not gonna notice that TSA baton-cam shoved up your ass.

I agree.I smell smokescreen.What is the other hand doing?

Logged

those that would give up a little liberty to obtain a little security,deserve neither and will lose both.